MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035149534 · doi:10.1155/2012/274305

The Brain Drain Potential of Students in the African Health and Nonhealth Sectors

2012· article· en· W2035149534 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Crush, Wade Pendleton

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Population Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsBalsillie School of International Affairs
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsBrain drainEmigrationGraduation (instrument)Work (physics)PsychologyInvestment (military)Economic growthPublic healthPolitical scienceMedicineBusinessNursingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The departure of health professionals to Europe and North America is placing an intolerable burden on public health systems in many African countries. Various retention, recall, and replacement policies to ameliorate the impact of this brain drain have been suggested, none of which have been particularly successful to date. The key question for the future is whether the brain drain of health sector skills is likely to continue and whether the investment of African countries in training health professionals will continue to be lost through emigration. This paper examines the emigration intentions of trainee health professionals in six Southern African countries. The data was collected by the Southern African Migration Program (SAMP) in a survey of final-year students across the region which included 651 students training for the health professions. The data also allows for the comparison of health sector with other students. The analysis presented in this paper shows very high emigration potential amongst all final-year students. Health sector students do show a slightly higher inclination to leave than those training to work in other sectors. These findings present a considerable challenge for policy makers seeking to encourage students to stay at home and work after graduation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.599
Teacher spread0.465 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Population ResearchSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207